Skip to main content
Environmental Health Perspectives logoLink to Environmental Health Perspectives
letter
. 2004 Nov;112(15):A865. doi: 10.1289/ehp.112-a865a

More Recent Studies on Fragrances

Ladd W Smith 1
PMCID: PMC1247643  PMID: 15531417

In response to Curtis (2004), I would like to cite more recent studies by researchers at the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM) that address the health and environmental effects of fragrances.

The RIFM strives to be the international leader for the safe use of fragrance ingredients (Balk et al. 2004; Bickers et al. 2003a; Cadby et al. 2002b; Smith 2003) and has ongoing research programs in the areas of fragrance allergy, human health effects (Cadby et al. 2002a; Bickers et al. 2003b), respiratory safety (Isola et al. 2004; Smith et al. 2004), and environmental impact (Salvito et al. 2002, 2004). The RIFM’s comprehensive, logical, and documented research methods are modeled after the National Academy of Sciences’ (NRC) Elements of Risk Assessment and Risk Management (NRC 1994).

Research is prioritized (Ford et al. 2000) and designed using information in the RIFM proprietary database (RIFM 2004) and according to the needs of the scientific community and the general public. The database provides a clearinghouse for human health and environmental studies, as well as basic material information, and is maintained by continuously monitoring journals, government reports, company-sponsored research, and available literature to enable analysis of documented conclusions.

All available information pertaining to the safety of fragrance materials, study protocols, and results are reviewed by an independent international panel of scientific and medical experts from the fields of toxicology, dermatology, pathology, and environmental science. Research results and safety evaluations are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at professional meetings.

In addition, the RIFM accepts proposals for sponsored scientific research and will work jointly with interested third parties to further knowledge on health and environmental issues.

References

  1. Balk F, Blok H, Salvito DT. 2004. Recent studies conducted by the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials in support of the risk assessment process. In: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol 3X (Rimkus G, ed). New York:Springer Verlag, 311–331.
  2. Bickers DR, Calow P, Greim HA, Hanifin JM, Rogers AE, Saurat JH, et al. The safety assessment of fragrance materials. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2003a;37:218–273. doi: 10.1016/s0273-2300(03)00003-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bickers D, Calow P, Greim H, Hanifin JM, Rogers AE, Saurat JH, et al. A toxicologic and dermatologic assessment of linalool and related esters when used as fragrance ingredients. Food Chem Toxicol. 2003b;41(7):919–942. doi: 10.1016/s0278-6915(03)00016-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cadby PA, Troy WR, Vey MGH. Consumer exposure to fragrance ingredients: providing estimates for safety evaluation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2002a;36(3):246–252. doi: 10.1006/rtph.2002.1581. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cadby PA, Troy WR, Middleton JD, Vey MGH. Fragrances: are they safe? Flavour Fragr J. 2002b;17:472–477. [Google Scholar]
  6. Curtis L. Toxicity of fragrances [Letter] Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112:A461. doi: 10.1289/ehp.112-a461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ford RA, Domeyer B, Easterday O, Maier K, Middleton J. Criteria for development of a database for safety evaluation of fragrance materials. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2000;31:166–181. doi: 10.1006/rtph.1999.1362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Isola DA, Rogers RE, Ansari R, Smith LW. Exposure characterization from a surrogate fine fragrance [Abstract] Toxicologist. 2004;78(S-1):107. [Google Scholar]
  9. National Research Council (NRC) 1994. Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
  10. RIFM (Research Institute for Frangrance Materials) 2004. RIFM Database. Available: http://www.rifm.org/members_rifm.htm [accessed 30 August 2004].
  11. Salvito DT, Senna RJ, Federle TW. A framework for prioritizing fragrance materials for aquatic risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2002;21(6):1301–1308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Salvito DT, Vey MGH, Senna RJ. Fragrance materials and their environmental impact. Flavour Fragr J. 2004;19:105–108. [Google Scholar]
  13. Smith LW. The scientific basis for sound decisions on fragrance material use [Editorial] Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2003;37:172. [Google Scholar]
  14. Smith LW, Rogers RE, Black MS, Isola DA. Exposure characterizations of three fragranced products [Abstract] Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2004;197(3):189. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Environmental Health Perspectives are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES